ReviewNeuro-oncology advances
Comparison meta-analysis of intraoperative MRI-guided needle biopsy versus conventional stereotactic needle biopsies.
Review in Neuro-oncology advances. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes of Laser Interstitial Thermal Therapy-Augmented Surgery in the Management of Subcortical Glioblastoma.Neurosurgery practice · 2026Article
- Translational Considerations for Injectable Biomaterials and Bioscaffolds to Repair and Regenerate Brain Tissue.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Review
- Comparison of the predictive value of intraoperative MRI and intraoperative histopathological examination for diagnostic stereotactic biopsy yield in patients with brain gliomas.Brain & spine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: MRI-guided needle biopsy (INB) is an emerging alternative to conventional frame-based or frameless stereotactic needle biopsy (SNB). Studies of INB have been limited to select case series, and comparative studies between INB and SNB remain a missing gap in the literature. We performed a meta-analysis to compare INB and SNB literature in terms of diagnostic yield, surgical morbidity and mortality, tumor size, and procedural time. Methods: We identified 36 separate cohorts in 26 studies of SNB (including both frameless and frame-based biopsies, 3374 patients) and 27 studies of INB (977 patients). Meta-regression and meta-analysis by proportions were performed. Results: Relative to publications that studied SNB, publications studying INB more likely involved brain tumors located in the eloquent cerebrum (79.4% versus 62.6%, Conclusions: Our meta-analysis indicates that, relative to SNB, INB is more often performed for the challenging, smaller-sized brain tumors located in the eloquent cerebrum. INB is associated with lower surgical morbidity and improved diagnostic yield.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.